The advertising above is just a source of revenue, and sometimes, I don't know what will appear there.

Unique grips and accessories for your 1911!

Clayton Cramer's BLOG

Clayton's commentary on news and events of the day. Broadly speaking, I'm a conservative with libertarian sympathies (getting more conservative as my children get older).



Email me at blogmail at claytoncramer dot com. Sorry to be so indirect, but all spambots must die! But they haven't died yet! Include the word spamIamnot in your subject line to make sure that my spam blocker lets you through.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Saturday, July 04, 2009
 
Calculating Serrurier Truss Deformation

If you don't know what this is, see here. I'm thinking of seeing if I can reduce the weight of Big Bertha 2.0 by replacing the current combination of aluminum tubes, turnbuckles, and guy wires, with a single Serrurier Truss design. Moonlite Accessories sells components; I need to figure out how to compute the deformation of a Serrurirer Truss design, to see if I can replace the current scheme with something that would be just as stiff, but lighter.

My intutive sense (which is often wrong), is that the deformation of any single tube will be the same as a tube parallel to the optical axis, but with cos and sin included as well! In addition, the top and bottom tube assemblies necessarily add some stiffness, so the total deformation of a six tube truss will be a maximum of 1/6th of the deformation of a single tube. (And in practice, of course, a bit less.) A book called The Design of Welded Structures has been recommended, but if I can find something online (or an expert in my readership--very likely!), all the better.

The current scheme where I have a single aluminum channel that runs the length of the telescope can be replaced with a single piece of channel that runs from the lower section (where more than 3/4 of the weight is located) to the mounting plate. This, by itself, will knock at least six pounds off the total weight. If replacing the current square tubes, the guy wires, and the turnbuckles, managed to knock another two or three pounds off the total weight, it would be worth it. (That would get Big Bertha 2.0 down to about 48 pounds.)

The other advantage is that I could disassemble Big Bertha 2.0 easily and quickly for vehicle transport, and it would simply putting on the mount, because I could put the lower assembly onto the mount as a somewhat lighter, and considerably less unwieldy structure, then put the tubes in place, and mount the upper cage on the tubes.

Labels:



 
One More Interesting Aspect of Corvette Mileage

I mentioned yesterday
the good gas mileage the Corvette gets. I made another discovery as well on the trip back from Bend.

You are perhaps aware that gas mileage of most cars declines somewhat if the windows are open--and in some cases, enough that you actually get better mileage with your windows closed, and the air conditioning running.

I was driving with the top off the car, and I decided to find out if the "closed windows get better mileage" is true under these circumstances. Sure enough! The Corvette had an instantaneous gas mileage setting, which seems to sample fuel consumption every second.

When I had some dead flat sections of road (or at least, with the same apparent slope for miles on end), I did some experimenting. First I rolled down the driver's window--and I seem to have lost about .75 or 1.0 miles per gallon. Rolling down the passenger's window seemed to give almost the same amount of loss (which is not too surprising). It would appear that both windows down with the top off took me down about 1.5 miles per gallon. With the windows up, and the cruise control set at 68 mph, the instantaneous measure bounced around between about 29.5 and about 31.5. With the windows down, it was more like 27.4 to about 29.8.

I'm not sure what the mileage would have been like with the top on (since you can't really put it on and off while driving, unless you are incredibly stupid), but I suspect better.

Labels:



 
Radiation Survey Meter Calibrated

I mentioned a while back that I was sending my Jordan Electronics CD V-710 Model 2 radiation survey meter off for calibration. It came back very quickly from KI4U, Inc.

Useful piece of information: there was a sheet that came back that warned,
DO NOT STORE OR SHIP RADIOLOGICAL INSTRUMENTS WITH BATTERIES INSTALLED! INSTRUMENTS WITH BATTERIES INSTALLED MAY BE MIS-IDENTIFIED AS EXPLOSIVE DEVICES.
Yes, I can see that! For all of my readers who regularly ship radiation survey meters, keep that in mind!

Also, while they were able to calibrate on the X 1 and X 100 scales, it failed on the X 10 scale. In case you aren't familiar with these type of survey meters: there is a switch that lets you move through all three scales, and the dial shows a range from 0.0 to 0.5 Roentgens/hour. You multiply the scale accordingly.

On the X 1 range, it is showing just barely above 0. (A typical background exposure is 200 milliroentgens/year, which would be about .000022 Roentgens/hour. Altitude may be part of the slightly higher rate that I am seeing) If I have occasion to go up to the X 100 scale (meaning that I am measuring between 1 and 50 Roentgens/hour)--well, that's like really, really bad news, since 100 Roentgens/hour for five hours is lethal--and a combined dose of 100-200 Roentgens is going to make you very, very sick. The note from KI4U also explained:
The CD V-710 has a single calibration on the X 10 scale. All 3 scales are within the acceptable limits. The calibration potientiometer cannot be adjusted any higher, indicating that the ion chamber is becomng weak. * Did not pass on X 10.
That's not too surprising--this is a 50 year old instrument. (That it still works at all is impressive.) If I ever use this device as anything but a prop for an upcoming lecture on the Cold War, McCarthyism, and Arthur Miller's The Crucible, the X 1 and X 100 scales will be sufficient, I fear. And of course, the X 10 scale works--it's just that it is reading too low: an actual 2.96 Roentgens/hour is showing on the meter as 2.0 Roentgens/hour; multiply by about 50% to get the actual level.


Friday, July 03, 2009
 
Things I Love About The Corvette

On the road to Bend Sunday: 28.6 mpg. On the road back from Bend today (by wild coincidence): 28.6 mpg. And the cruise control was set at 65, 66, or 68 almost the entire way (except for a stretch of I-84 when I re-entered the Free State of Idaho). It took me 4 hours and 19 minutes elapsed time to get there on Sunday from Horseshoe Bend. (The Corvette has an elapsed time counter as well.)

In spite of being a "sports car," it has a very comfortable, controlled but firm ride on reasonably smooth pavement.

Labels:



Thursday, July 02, 2009
 
Epoxy Over Aluminum

Fiberglass is made by combining epoxy with glass fibers, and carbon fiber composite is made by combining epoxy with carbon fiber. Epoxy by itself is stiff, but not terribly strong. Glass fiber and carbon fiber are flexible and strong, but not stiff. The combination of the two gives a material that is very stiff for its weight.

So, what happens if you use the same approach to combine epoxy with aluminum? Thin sheets of aluminum, like glass and carbon fiber, are very strong but flexible. Could you apply epoxy to aluminum to create something that gives you a high stiffness to weight ratio? I see references that suggest that it gets used in boating, but I can't find anything specific to discussing this.

Unless you can provide me with better information, I'm tempted to experiment with this over the weekend--take a thin sheet of aluminum, epoxy it, and then see how it compares to an uncoated sheet of aluminum for stiffness and weight.

Yes, I'm trying to find a way to get Big Bertha 2.0's weight down a bit more.

UPDATE: Several people have informed me that in fact, carbon and glass fiber are very strong and stiff by themselves--and the epoxy is the weak part of the composite. They also tell me that because of the aluminum oxide layer on aluminum, getting a decent durable bond with epoxy is quite difficult--as at least one experimental aircraft builder discovered the hard way.


 
Am I Being Unreasonable?

I received a ScopeRoller order on July 1. I emailed the customer back the same day, informing it that because we were waiting on wheels to ship from Missouri, it would be July 10 before we could ship. The response? A refund request because I couldn't ship immediately.

I'll make a refund--a customer this easily upset isn't likely a customer that I want that badly. But I don't think responding same day to an order with an anticipated production and ship date 10 days in the future is particularly absurd. Has the Internet bred a generation of hopelessly impatient sorts?

Labels:



 
Very Un-PC Humor

This was forwarded to me, and who knows, maybe it didn't really come from a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan. But it sounds like it could have, and it's still pretty funny!

US troops definition of Taliban

The US troops in Afghanistan proved they have retained their sense of humor. One of them sent this. "YOU MAY BE TALIBAN IF ..."

1. You refine heroin for a living but you have a moral objection to beer.

2. You own a $3,000 machine gun and $5,000 rocket launcher but you can't afford shoes.

3. You have more wives than teeth.

4. You wipe your butt with your bare hand but consider bacon "unclean."

5. You think vests come in two styles: bullet-proof and suicide.

6. You can't think of anyone you haven't declared Jihad against.

7. You consider television dangerous but routinely carry explosives in your clothing.

8. You were amazed to discover that cell phones have uses other than setting off roadside bombs.

9. You have nothing against women and think every man should own at least one.

10. You've always had a crush on your neighbor's goat.

Labels:



Wednesday, July 01, 2009
 
Do These People Have No Shame?

From July 1, 2009 Washington Post/MSNBC:
WASHINGTON - Sen. Daniel K. Inouye's staff contacted federal regulators last fall to ask about the bailout application of an ailing Hawaii bank that he had helped to establish and where he has invested the bulk of his personal wealth.

The bank, Central Pacific Financial, was an unlikely candidate for a program designed by the Treasury Department to bolster healthy banks. The firm's losses were depleting its capital reserves. Its primary regulator, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., already had decided that it didn't meet the criteria for receiving a favorable recommendation and had forwarded the application to a council that reviewed marginal cases, according to agency documents.

Two weeks after the inquiry from Inouye's office, Central Pacific announced that the Treasury would inject $135 million.

As I pointed out with respect to a Republican member of Congress a couple of years ago, you can somewhat understand why someone who is scraping by to pay his bills might be tempted to abuse his political position. But when you are already wealthy enough that you don't need to work--and in the case of Senator Inouye, you are so old that you can't possibly spend the money that you already have before you die--why takes actions that at least look corrupt, and probably are?

And there are so many of these of late: Sen. Conyers' wife, Monica Conyers, who resigned from the Detroit City Council after her conviction, and whose husband used his position to assist in the corruption. And the list of these crooks (overwhelmingly Democrats) is so long and disappointing. You know, if Americans cared about corruption by public officials, the Democrats would have something to worry about at the next election. But pretty clearly, most Americans don't let this bug them much.

Labels:



Monday, June 29, 2009
 
Dealing With Inflation

I mentioned a bit more than a month ago that I was wrestling with the question of how to deal with an inflationary economy. I'm still wrestling. The economic disaster hasn't injured me quite as much in the non-retirement portfolio as I had feared, or rather, the damage to my stock mutual funds and some of my bonds has been almost compensated by the improvement in some of my other bonds. The Fannie Mae bonds, for example, are actually above par! And I have some hope, that over the next ten years, either the voters will get smart enough to kick the Democrats out of power, or more direct action will make the value of anything but freeze dried food and ammunition rather irrelevant.

Liz Ann Sonders of Schwab is indicating that there is beginning to be a cautious, realistic optimism about the market, and investors are moving from cash to a variety of investments. I don't find this hard to believe; the economy was supposed to rebound by second half anyway, and even the crooks who control Congress couldn't completely screw this up. As Sonders pointed out on June 24, the Fed believes that the recession is beginning to ease, and their actions reflect this. But also:
Schwab's Investment Strategy Council continues to believe inflation is not a near-term risk.

Although money supply has grown, the money multiplier (or velocity of money) has collapsed. Quantitative/credit easing ("printing money") doesn't cause inflation unless that money is getting into the economy … at this point, it isn't.

In the longer-term, credit growth will revive and the economic recovery will be more clear—and only then will the Fed need to begin the tightening process. The Fed made it clear that stage is still well ahead of us.
Which fits with some stuff that I linked to several months ago. For those that are still many years from retirement, slowly easing back into conservative growth stock mutual funds might be a good idea. For those of us who aren't that many years away, perhaps either short-term bonds (maturities of 2-5 years) make sense, or adjustable rate bonds.

Of course, don't make the mistake that I made, buying some Sallie Mae adjustable bonds--ones that could theoretically drop to 0% interest if interest rates fell to 0. Not like that could happen, I told myself! Unlike a fixed rate bond, where falling interest rates at least make the value of the bond go up--with these, not only does the interest rate fall--but so does the value of the bond, since it now pays a much lower interest rate. I guess that I will just hold onto these, until they mature (some years out), or the inflation ogre shows up and spoils the party--at which point, those bonds will probably be worth having.


 
Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Testing: 1951-1963

This is part of the Battlefield of the Cold War series, volume 1. This is a detailed history of nuclear weapons testing by the United States. In spite of the title, it actually covers 1945 to 1963, and is not limited to the Nevada Test Site. It includes information about the Pacific and outer space nuclear weapons tests, as well as those conducted at the Nevada Test Site--including a list of all the test explosions (including yield and purpose) in this period.

In light of the subsequent problems of the Downwinders (who allege, and I guess with good reason, that they were injured by fallout from the tests), there's a lot of interesting discussion of the struggles over what the proper limits of the tests performed. It would appear that there was a genuine effort to avoid unnecessarily dangerous exposure to those outside the test site--but the combination of bad luck and insufficient understanding of the risks meant that these efforts failed.

This makes a nice companion to Trinity and Beyond: The Atomic Bomb Movie.

Labels:



 
More Humorous Posters

The first one really gave me a laugh.



The second one is a little more vulgar in language than I prefer, but it really captures the insanity of our first Affirmative Action President. (Why couldn't our first black President have been Thomas Sowell?)

Labels:



 
"Pedophiles Aren't Gay"

This is conventional wisdom--and I've been told this repeatedly by gay activists and their liberal apologists--even when the pedophile preys exclusively on little boys.

Sexual preference is on a different axis from pedophilia. There are heterosexual pedophiles, bisexual pedophiles, and homosexual pedophiles. As I pointed out in 2006, in spite of the talking heads that the news media interview on the subject, serious, very PC scientific journals still use terms like "homosexual pedophile" and "heterosexual pedophile" to describe these offenders.

It is true that a majority of homosexuals are not pedophiles. It is also true that a majority of pedophiles are heterosexual. (Since heterosexuals are about 97% of the population, of course a majority of pedophiles are heterosexual.) Scholarly works published into the early 1990s (before Political Correctness took over) were still showing that homosexuals and bisexuals were 20-30% of pedophiles--or about 8-10x disproportionate to their fraction of the population. While I'm a bit skeptical of the article linked here, because Paul Cameron has a strong ideological orientation on this, it is curious that the percentage of homosexual child sexual abuse that he found analyzing Illinois foster care data was...24%, right in the middle of historical data. And there are cases like this one, involving an openly gay couple, molesting a foster child. Or Paula Poundstone, a lesbian entertainer who was charged with lewd acts on one of her under 14 foster children.

I've also pointed out that one rather special group of pedophiles--Catholic priests--overwhelmingly victimize little boys: 81%. And guess what? Catholic priests have about 11x the rate of AIDS of the general population. (Surprised? I was, too. But when I look at those two figures together, I'm not surprised.)

So let's not pretend that this horrific case from Duke University is just a big surprise, shall we? From the June 28, 2009 North Carolina News-Observer:
Federal authorities say Lombard, 42, of 24 Indigo Creek Trail, performed sexual acts on his son and invited an undercover investigator online to fly to North Carolina and do the same.

Lombard owns the home with another man, according to Durham County property records. The pair bought the home, which sits at the end of a narrow path lined with trees and multicolored homes, in May 2007, the records show. The co-owner has not been accused of any wrongdoing.

...

Lombard, associate director of Duke's Center for Health Policy, was arrested Wednesday evening at his home. Investigators seized two webcams, five computers and a sex toy, among other items, after searching his home.

The 5-year-old and another child in the home were placed in protective custody.

...

Lombard, a licensed clinical social worker with a master's degree in social work, is a health-disparities researcher who studies HIV/AIDS in the rural South.

Professor Mike Adams points to the wailing fest from the Duke faculty when the lacrosse players were falsely accused of raping a black woman, and were almost railroaded by a dishonest district attorney. But this is going to be a lot more entertaining:

So it will be interesting to see how Duke faculty members respond to Frank Lombard. Because he is white, Lombard is fair game at Duke, isn’t he? But Lombard is also gay, so will that complicate things?

Unfortunately for Frank Lombard, the affidavit in support of his arrest warrant shows that this second Duke rape case will also have a strong racial component. According to a confidential source (CS) a man using the user name “cooper2” or “cooperse” logged onto an internet-based video chat room. CS saw him perform oral sex on an African-American child under the age of ten. He also performed other acts on the child, which are too obscene to be described in this column.

The user name “cooper2” has now been linked to Frank Lombard, the associate director Duke University’s Center for Health Policy. A second source has now alleged that “cooper2” has confessed to being “into incest” and that he has adopted two African American children.

The only good news coming out of this story is about Frank Lombard’s live-in homosexual partner. The affidavit in support of Lombard’s arrest warrant shows that he made special arrangements when molesting the child – sometimes even by drugging the child – to make sure his partner did not find out.

As I said, most homosexuals are not molesters. And there are enough heterosexual molesters out there--certainly a strong majority--that if you decide to focus on gay men as the danger to children, you aren't being very honest. I suspect that most gay couples that are adopting children are trying to create a white picket fence middle class life that they can't have without marrying the opposite sex. But there are some creeps out there, too, and I do worry a bit that in the mad rush to allow gay adoption, the agencies involved aren't being careful enough in screening.

When we were raising our kids, we were extraordinarily careful who we let watch our children, and I encourage you to be similarly careful. Do not assume that [fill in your favorite male relative] could never have done something like that! Children make stuff up, without question. But they are victimized--a lot.

As I pointed out a while back, both here and here, there is a curious connection between child sexual abuse (CSA) and adult homosexuality--enough so that it seems plausible that CSA causes at least some adult homosexuality. More worrisome is that a small percentage of CSA survivors end up becoming molesters themselves when they grow up. Usually male victims become molesters--but sometimes, female victims do so as well. The exact mechanism isn't well understood, but the connection seems clear enough. And that's part of why we aren't making any progress on stopping it. This ideological pretense that pedophiles are always heterosexual, or don't have an adult sexual orientation is not only false, it is dangerously false.

Labels: ,



Sunday, June 28, 2009
 
No, It Isn't An Article From The Onion

But you are forgiven for wondering at first. It comes from the June 25, 2009 Telegraph:
Canterbury is sufficiently gay, council inspectors rule

One of Britain's most historic cities, Canterbury, has been told it is sufficiently gay – after a complaint sparked a two-month investigation costing thousands of pounds.

A government watchdog decided that Canterbury in Kent does enough to promote homosexual culture, rejecting a complaint by local activists.

The Local Government Ombudsman – who asked for the city's council to provide evidence of how it supported the gay community – said it was satisfied the pink pound was being catered for.

As part of the investigation, the council had to prove its inclusiveness by giving details of "touring plays and musicals, for example, which would be of interest to the LGBT community".

And it had to show that it had "put forward suggestions for small events that it might help fund, as well as proposals for other events such as exhibitions".

Rob Davies, spokesman for the council, said: "Obviously we're delighted with the outcome of the investigation.

"We feel we do a great deal for the gay community in Canterbury and we have always tried to support various gay events and promotions."

"But at the same time it is not the duty of any council to set up a gay bar – that's not what councils do."

The two-month investigation began at the end of April after a letter was sent from two representatives of Pride in Canterbury.

Labels: